AB060. Peripheral attentional allocation during visual search in the presence of an artificial scotoma in younger and older adults
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Age related macular degeneration (AMD) is one of the main causes of vision loss in older adults, generating, in most cases, a central scotoma that reduces central visual acuity (Noble & Chaudhary, 2010). People affected by AMD have to rely on peripheral visual information and would highly benefit from efficiently allocating their attention to the periphery. Indeed, attention can improve peripheral spatial resolution (Carrasco, Ling & Read, 2004) and can be allocated to a certain expanse of space outside of the central visual span, known as the attentional span. Attentional span has been shown to be decreased in people with AMD with less attention allocated to the periphery and more to the central visual field (Cheong et al., 2008), however it remains unknown whether aging is also a contributing factor. Methods: Fourteen healthy younger (mean age =21.8 years, SD =1.5) and 8 older adults (mean age =69.6 years, SD =7.3) performed a pop-out and a serial version of a visual search task, in the presence of different sized gaze-contingent invisible and visible artificial central scotomata (no scotoma, 3° diameter, 5° and 7°). Participants were asked to indicate as quickly as possible whether a target was present or not among distractors whose number varied (16, 32 or 64 objects). We wished to determine whether the size of the scotoma, occluding different degrees of central vision, affected visual search differently for younger vs. older participants. Results: Both the younger and older participants showed higher reaction times (RTs) to find the target for the serial version (M =2,074 ms for younger adults, M =3,853 ms for older adults) compared to the pop-out version (M =866 ms, M =1,475 ms, P<0.001) and for more distractors (32 distractors compared to 16, and 64 compared to 32, P<0.01). Older adults showed longer RTs than younger adults for both versions of the task (P<0.01). We found a significant effect of scotoma size on older adults (3° scotoma M =3,276 ms; 7° scotoma M =3,877 ms, P<0.05), however, accurate performance was higher with no scotoma (96% vs. 92%, P<0.05) in the pop-out search task. This suggests that older participants privileged a fast decision at the expense of performance in those cases. For the younger adults, RTs were higher in the serial search task in the presence of a scotoma (M =2,074 ms) compared to the control condition (M =1,665 ms, P>0.05). Conclusions: These results suggest that older adults take longer to perform visual search compared to younger adults and tend to use peripheral visual less than younger adults; larger central scotomas disrupted their performance but not that of younger participants, who performed equally well with different central scotoma sizes. These findings suggest that aging is a contributing factor in the decrease of the peripheral attentional span.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».